Cardinal Pell and Dawkins on Q-and-A

[JimC]

I watched some of it, but then, as someone said earlier in the thread, it is same-old, same-old...

For those that don't know the Australian politico-religious scene, Pell is a revolting individual, part of the arch-conservative side of Australian catholicism, and has resolutely defended pedophile priests against their victims for years. A complete arsehole, take it from me...

[maiforpeace]

This material may be old hat to us old hat atheists, but it's great to have it on hand for any of the new unconverted.

Thanks Faithfree!

[mistermack]

I was amazed at how stupid and ignorant the cardinal came across.

Really? Here's a man that does not just believe in a fairy story, but actually made a career out of being an expert at it. Essentially he's like those fat balding guys that think they're dwarves who tend to own comic shops or hang around conventions, only his costume wearing demented antics are somehow seen as adding to his legitimacy, rather than being pitied as borderline desperate Aspie virgin.

One day they'll be wearing Jheri curls and red leather trousers jacket and talking about the Holy Jakko, who was the lover of children, who was both man and woman and neither. Who was betrayed by his own, sent to trial, acquitted and then was poisoned by the (hmmmm let's say) fiendish Messicants. (who by that time will have crafted violent drug cartels Santeria, Satanism and Catholicism into the mainstream orthodoxy.)

Either that or Yoda.

I was just amazed that someone that clueless could have made cardinal.
Obviously, the whole thing is bollocks, but you would think a cardinal could defend it better than that.
Even though I disagree with religion, I enjoy a well-put argument for it.
It just goes to show, it's not what you know................

[tattuchu]

I watched the whole thing last night. I thought it was funny when one questioner referred to the Cardinal by his full name, without the title Also hilarious when the good Cardinal was relating an anecdote about getting a group of English boys ready...and then pausing whilst a smattering of snickers ensued from the audience

[mistermack]

I watched the whole thing last night. I thought it was funny when one questioner referred to the Cardinal by his full name, without the title Also hilarious when the good Cardinal was relating an anecdote about getting a group of English boys ready...and then pausing whilst a smattering of snickers ensued from the audience

It wasn't just one questioner, either, I think a lot of them just said "George Pell", including the man in the middle. I don't think it bothered him, but when I was a kid, a cardinal would have been treated like a demi-god, and called his eminence, or something like that.

He said a few things that were new to me. That business about animals having souls was total news to me. I don't know if that's his own opinion, or official church doctrine, I was told very firmly by the priests when I was young that only people had souls.
I can't see how such an important discovery as animal souls has passed me by.
He seemed to be saying that the only difference between animal souls and human souls was the degree of sophistication of a human one. All totally new to me.
So if they got that wrong for 2,000 years, what else have they fucked up?

[tattuchu]

Yeah, the Cardinal also said that we were special because we could talk, we could communicate. As if other animals don't communicate
Oh, but speaking of surprising things he said, I didn't know atheists (according to him) could go to Heaven. Isn't the whole accepting-Jesus-as-your-Lord-and-Savior business important anymore?

[Audley Strange]

I was amazed at how stupid and ignorant the cardinal came across.

Really? Here's a man that does not just believe in a fairy story, but actually made a career out of being an expert at it. Essentially he's like those fat balding guys that think they're dwarves who tend to own comic shops or hang around conventions, only his costume wearing demented antics are somehow seen as adding to his legitimacy, rather than being pitied as borderline desperate Aspie virgin.

One day they'll be wearing Jheri curls and red leather trousers jacket and talking about the Holy Jakko, who was the lover of children, who was both man and woman and neither. Who was betrayed by his own, sent to trial, acquitted and then was poisoned by the (hmmmm let's say) fiendish Messicants. (who by that time will have crafted violent drug cartels Santeria, Satanism and Catholicism into the mainstream orthodoxy.)

Either that or Yoda.

I was just amazed that someone that clueless could have made cardinal.
Obviously, the whole thing is bollocks, but you would think a cardinal could defend it better than that.
Even though I disagree with religion, I enjoy a well-put argument for it.
It just goes to show, it's not what you know................

I know what you mean about a well put argument, but while I have heard many about everything from aliens and magic through to historical Jesuses Jesii? and even plausible arguments for such far featched things as good and evil or democracy, the weirdos of the book central premis is absent and thus they have to skirt around the issue because not only can you not prove that God does not exist, but you can't prove God does.

Religion is like a band who tell you their last vinyl album has a secret track in the hole in the middle, but that you can't ever hear it, you have to trust them it's there after all look the rest of the album and songs are.

God is missing.

[maiforpeace]

I watched the whole thing last night. I thought it was funny when one questioner referred to the Cardinal by his full name, without the title Also hilarious when the good Cardinal was relating an anecdote about getting a group of English boys ready...and then pausing whilst a smattering of snickers ensued from the audience

It wasn't just one questioner, either, I think a lot of them just said "George Pell", including the man in the middle. I don't think it bothered him, but when I was a kid, a cardinal would have been treated like a demi-god, and called his eminence, or something like that.

He said a few things that were new to me. That business about animals having souls was total news to me. I don't know if that's his own opinion, or official church doctrine, I was told very firmly by the priests when I was young that only people had souls.
I can't see how such an important discovery as animal souls has passed me by.

[apophenia]

I haven't watched it, but heard something about Dawkins pressuring a rather un-Catholic confession out of some Cardinal, I can only presume this is the one. And don't knock Australia, they're home to some awesome skeptics and skeptical organizations, so it's not some backwater cesspool. The thing you have to understand about these debates is they're not about winning converts so much as pouffing their wares for the faithful. And it's likely the same as here, where the pro-SkyDaddy people bus in supporters from far and wide. I thought Dawkins had officially given up debating theists, or am I thinking of someone else? It's not an uncommon sentiment once you take the blush off the rose and realize, you're not accomplishing anything, save adding credibility to their crap by giving them a forum where their prerehearsed dog and pony show is the only clear winner.

[Rum]

It can only be a good thing that people's reaction to the Catholic Church and bishops is often these days one of slightly embarrassed giggling and cynical sneering.